Old 07-30-2020, 11:45 AM   #1
hanswurst123
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Hamburg
Posts: 104
Default Hyperthreading? Singlecore? Multicore?

Hi there,

I'm thinking of getting a new computer and after searching the forum I'm more confused than enlightened
I found a few older threads but I have the feeling that their information could be outdated.

So my main questions are:
1. Should hyperthreading be turned on or off? (or should you even buy a HT processor or not?)
2. What's better: a few very powerful singlecores or instead as most (mediocre) multicores as possible?

Glad about any help!
hanswurst123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2020, 01:15 PM   #2
Stella645
Human being with feelings
 
Stella645's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 3,648
Default

1. On. Yes.
2. Gross oversimplification but for very low latency performance or loads of mixbuss processing - highest possible single core speed. More instances of plugs spread evenly across tracks - more cores.

Get some idea of the cpus you're looking at and see if Scan's DAWbench has tested them to compare.
Stella645 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2020, 04:27 AM   #3
hanswurst123
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Hamburg
Posts: 104
Default

Thanks for your reply!

In terms of hyperthreading I found this podcast which is half a year old where Justin Frankel says that HT can be a problem. But I don't really get all the technical details.. he says that when you have all CPUs running + HT turned on you only get 75% of the CPU power. But I ask myself when will you not have all CPUs working? When I work in Reaper I always have tons of tracks and tons of plugins and I have 6 cores (12 threads) which are always running simultaneously. Or maybe it IS because I have HT turned on? should I try turning it off? I don't no..

I think clearing this question could be so helpful for many users especially when thinking about buying new CPUs. Beginning at 38m 38s:

https://dawbench.libsyn.com/episode-...present-future

The parts before that time stamp are about paralel / serial processing and I think you were right.. so for being capable of doing all possible stuff in a DAW I think it's the best to have the highest possible amount of CPUs whilst having the highest possible amount of power each
hanswurst123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2020, 11:48 AM   #4
Stella645
Human being with feelings
 
Stella645's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 3,648
Default

Dawbench have posted that they generally see better performance with HT on but also mentions if cpu is pushed to the limit it can't help (but no mention of loss of power)

I guess it's one you have to try for yourself on your system with a few projects and see what you think.
Stella645 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2020, 03:23 AM   #5
Softsynth
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 8,696
Default

To complicate matters not all cores are equal. The CPU architecture and cache memory play their part in performance.

If you are using virtual instruments for the most part the single core performance is still pivotal, especially with software synthesis. You aren't likely to be only using a single core anyway.

I wouldn't want say 18 weaker AMD 2.5ghz cores for U-He Diva when four 4.25ghz intel cores may still perform better for that. The extra scores mostly metaphorically twiddling their thumbs when CPU intensive processing brings a weedy core to its knees.
OTOH the very high core count CPU might cope better with more simultaneous instances of Kontakt with CPU friendly virtual instruments loaded. Presuming the load is evenly shared amongst the cores.
Softsynth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2020, 04:48 AM   #6
1111Eugene
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 139
Default

with a powerfull cpu you still will come to the issue of PDC (plugins delays for processing)
so even if your cpu will be capable of processing thousands of tracksand plugins, there still will be a big number of pdc, that freezing\rendering fixes. and so the load of cpu decreases. So in my opinion, buy whatever you like, it doesn't matter mostly
1111Eugene is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2020, 11:24 AM   #7
Softsynth
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 8,696
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1111Eugene View Post
with a powerfull cpu you still will come to the issue of PDC (plugins delays for processing)
so even if your cpu will be capable of processing thousands of tracksand plugins, there still will be a big number of pdc, that freezing\rendering fixes. and so the load of cpu decreases. So in my opinion, buy whatever you like, it doesn't matter mostly
While I would agree that you cannot expect to be able to get rid of measurable latency completely (I don't have enough latency to detect while playing).
The fairly powerful i5 I had before my i7 wasn't able to handle as many instances of CPU hungry software synthesisers so I disagree based on experience that any CPU will do. The main difference between them was core performance and CPU cache memory not hyperthreading. Of course the i7's performance was intentionally downgraded by Microsoft by the Windows 10 CPU hobbling updates designed to stop the theoretical Meltdown and Spectre viruses anyway.
Softsynth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2020, 01:39 PM   #8
daniellumertz
Human being with feelings
 
daniellumertz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Brazil
Posts: 1,992
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Softsynth View Post
While I would agree that you cannot expect to be able to get rid of measurable latency completely (I don't have enough latency to detect while playing).
The fairly powerful i5 I had before my i7 wasn't able to handle as many instances of CPU hungry software synthesisers so I disagree based on experience that any CPU will do. The main difference between them was core performance and CPU cache memory not hyperthreading. Of course the i7's performance was intentionally downgraded by Microsoft by the Windows 10 CPU hobbling updates designed to stop the theoretical Meltdown and Spectre viruses anyway.
just curious, what i5 was you using and what i7 now?

also little offtopic but what are the softsynth cpu hungry are you using? Asking to know some more hahaha
daniellumertz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2020, 02:21 PM   #9
Softsynth
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 8,696
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by daniellumertz View Post
just curious, what i5 was you using and what i7 now?

also little offtopic but what are the softsynth cpu hungry are you using? Asking to know some more hahaha
Desktop CPUs i5 2400, i7 3770.
U-He Diva, Ace, and Repro for a start.
Softsynth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2020, 02:43 PM   #10
daniellumertz
Human being with feelings
 
daniellumertz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Brazil
Posts: 1,992
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Softsynth View Post
Desktop CPUs i5 2400, i7 3770.
U-He Diva, Ace, and Repro for a start.
I haven't tested u-he plugins , may check it one day. Pianoteq here kinda consumes a bit omnisphere also.
i5 - 8400 here
daniellumertz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2020, 11:41 PM   #11
Softsynth
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 8,696
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by daniellumertz View Post
I haven't tested u-he plugins , may check it one day. Pianoteq here kinda consumes a bit omnisphere also.
i5 - 8400 here
I find no problems with pianoteq 6 even at maximum polyphony. CPU optimization is magnificent given the quality. Then again I might only want 3 instances in a track tops (for different sounds).

Those U-He I mentioned are well known for CPU hit. This is settings/preset dependent. The higher the polyphony/simultaneous voices and quality settings the bigger the CPU hit.

Bazille can also push a CPU hard. The free version/s of Bazille will do too but for an Additional reason - it/they is/are single core only.
Softsynth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-09-2020, 08:38 AM   #12
serr
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 12,561
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hanswurst123 View Post
Hi there,

I'm thinking of getting a new computer and after searching the forum I'm more confused than enlightened
I found a few older threads but I have the feeling that their information could be outdated.

So my main questions are:
1. Should hyperthreading be turned on or off? (or should you even buy a HT processor or not?)
2. What's better: a few very powerful singlecores or instead as most (mediocre) multicores as possible?

Glad about any help!
Single core speed first priority.
Hyperthreading off.

There may be use cases that benefit from more CPU cores and/or hyperthreading. But the general advice is shop for single core speed first for audio. Hyperthreading off seems to work better with Reaper. There's a lot more CPU headroom when Reaper is allowed to use full CPU cores as it pleases.

There was some debate over hyperthreading a few years ago when I stumbled across the need to turn it off. I feel like there was another variable or two at play. Some people were apparently having different results. I was mixing some silly 350 track project at the time and just starting to get a single core to max out. It didn't seem reasonable to suspect this machine was really hitting max. Hyperthreading off cured it and I haven't looked back since.
serr is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2020, 07:16 AM   #13
hanswurst123
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Hamburg
Posts: 104
Default

Hi everyone. I was on vacation so sorry for my late response!
And many many thanks for all the answers coming in!

I wanted to test my sessions with HT off but for some reason I can't access the BIOS anymore since my keyboard only turns on when entering the Windows screen^^

But so far I checked a few bounces and I noticed that my CPU hits 60-80% BUT on all of the 12 threads.. also the clocking is 3500 on all threads.
So it seams that Reaper uses all threads (= 12 from 6 cores) but also uses them at high speed.
Sadly I can't turn HT off to check if there's any difference but so far it seems to work well when turned on.

Last edited by hanswurst123; 08-26-2020 at 10:24 AM.
hanswurst123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2020, 09:45 AM   #14
maralatho
Human being with feelings
 
maralatho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Santa Barbara
Posts: 317
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hanswurst123 View Post
Justin Frankel says that HT can be a problem. But I don't really get all the technical details.. he says that when you have all CPUs running + HT turned on you only get 75% of the CPU power.
I decided to test this. I'm by no means CPU-starved with my 12-core/24-thread Ryzen, but I've noticed that if I open a lot of projects into tabs -- say fifteen or more -- I'll start to hear pops and crackles even with "Run background projects" disabled.

NOTE: I'm working at 96k with a 64 sample buffer for the latency benefits when tracking.

So I went into the bios and disabled multi-threading, yielding 12-cores and 12-threads, and started opening projects. I have 18 projects open right now and can play any of them without pops and crackles. They're not simple projects, either -- each one has between two and four NI virtual instruments on them, and I've got the Waves TG12345 channel strip and J37 Tape plugin on every track. I'm also using Abbey Road Plates, H Reverb, and have the AR Studio 3 headphone plugin loaded into the Monitor FX.

So it definitely made a difference for me.
maralatho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2020, 03:00 AM   #15
hanswurst123
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Hamburg
Posts: 104
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by maralatho View Post
I decided to test this. I'm by no means CPU-starved with my 12-core/24-thread Ryzen, but I've noticed that if I open a lot of projects into tabs -- say fifteen or more -- I'll start to hear pops and crackles even with "Run background projects" disabled.

NOTE: I'm working at 96k with a 64 sample buffer for the latency benefits when tracking.

So I went into the bios and disabled multi-threading, yielding 12-cores and 12-threads, and started opening projects. I have 18 projects open right now and can play any of them without pops and crackles. They're not simple projects, either -- each one has between two and four NI virtual instruments on them, and I've got the Waves TG12345 channel strip and J37 Tape plugin on every track. I'm also using Abbey Road Plates, H Reverb, and have the AR Studio 3 headphone plugin loaded into the Monitor FX.

So it definitely made a difference for me.

That's quite interesting! Thank you so much for testing!

Although I would say these do not sound like huge projects for me. I'm currently working on a 70-tracks-composition with dozens of Kontakt instances, tons of plugins and also a few UHE Repros (which are frozen all of the time). And this project just lags and stutters all the time.
I mean playing at 2048 buffer size is duable, but everytime I move the cursor or I stop or safe the project or I solo a track it freezes / stutters for like 1-2 seconds.

So I definitely have to upgrade my system.. and I'm currently thinking of going for one of the following CPUs (information from the DAX website):

Intel i9-10980XE | 18x 3,0 - 4,6 GHz Turbo, HT
Intel i9-10940X | 14x 3,3 - 4,6 GHz Turbo, HT
Intel i9-10920X | 12x 3,5 - 4,6 GHz Turbo, HT

They all have HT but I think you can easily turn it off. And because I really want to buy a machine that lasts as long as possible the 18 core CPU is my favorite so far.
But assuming that more single core speed could be perform better I'm asking myself if the 14 or even the 12 core may be the better option for some cases?

I'm really confused..

If someone is interested. Other specs will be: 32 GB RAM (seems a bit unbalanced for that CPU but can be easily upgraded in future and normally I don't need more). 500 GB M2 SSD for system and software + 1 TB SSD for samples + 1TB SSD for project files and sound effects + 500 GB SSD for games.
Graphics card is a 2060S but maybe will be upgraded to a 3070 soon.
hanswurst123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2020, 10:21 AM   #16
daniellumertz
Human being with feelings
 
daniellumertz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Brazil
Posts: 1,992
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hanswurst123 View Post
That's quite interesting! Thank you so much for testing!

Although I would say these do not sound like huge projects for me. I'm currently working on a 70-tracks-composition with dozens of Kontakt instances, tons of plugins and also a few UHE Repros (which are frozen all of the time). And this project just lags and stutters all the time.
I mean playing at 2048 buffer size is duable, but everytime I move the cursor or I stop or safe the project or I solo a track it freezes / stutters for like 1-2 seconds.

So I definitely have to upgrade my system.. and I'm currently thinking of going for one of the following CPUs (information from the DAX website):

Intel i9-10980XE | 18x 3,0 - 4,6 GHz Turbo, HT
Intel i9-10940X | 14x 3,3 - 4,6 GHz Turbo, HT
Intel i9-10920X | 12x 3,5 - 4,6 GHz Turbo, HT

They all have HT but I think you can easily turn it off. And because I really want to buy a machine that lasts as long as possible the 18 core CPU is my favorite so far.
But assuming that more single core speed could be perform better I'm asking myself if the 14 or even the 12 core may be the better option for some cases?

I'm really confused..

If someone is interested. Other specs will be: 32 GB RAM (seems a bit unbalanced for that CPU but can be easily upgraded in future and normally I don't need more). 500 GB M2 SSD for system and software + 1 TB SSD for samples + 1TB SSD for project files and sound effects + 500 GB SSD for games.
Graphics card is a 2060S but maybe will be upgraded to a 3070 soon.
I don't know about these i9 I use a i5 8400 and is mostluy fine with a lot of kontakt and VSL and synths... so don't have any tips, just at the ssd remember that the biiger the ssd the faster it is, an 1TB ssd is faster than 500GB so maybe buying one big SSD for everything maybe will be cheaper and better. Maybe just one separeted for the samples if you wish.
daniellumertz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2020, 12:21 PM   #17
hanswurst123
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Hamburg
Posts: 104
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by daniellumertz View Post
I don't know about these i9 I use a i5 8400 and is mostluy fine with a lot of kontakt and VSL and synths... so don't have any tips, just at the ssd remember that the biiger the ssd the faster it is, an 1TB ssd is faster than 500GB so maybe buying one big SSD for everything maybe will be cheaper and better. Maybe just one separeted for the samples if you wish.
Good advice, didn't know that! I have all of them here already so I'll maybe wait with that.
But it just reminds on that I have some of the SSDs on slower ports installed because the mainboard just doesn't offer that many.
Also the graphics card is running with PCIe 8x instead of 16x.. hope this will all get better with the new system.
hanswurst123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2020, 01:00 PM   #18
poetnprophet
Human being with feelings
 
poetnprophet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 1,651
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hanswurst123 View Post
That's quite interesting! Thank you so much for testing!

Although I would say these do not sound like huge projects for me. I'm currently working on a 70-tracks-composition with dozens of Kontakt instances, tons of plugins and also a few UHE Repros (which are frozen all of the time). And this project just lags and stutters all the time.
I mean playing at 2048 buffer size is duable, but everytime I move the cursor or I stop or safe the project or I solo a track it freezes / stutters for like 1-2 seconds.

So I definitely have to upgrade my system.. and I'm currently thinking of going for one of the following CPUs (information from the DAX website):

Intel i9-10980XE | 18x 3,0 - 4,6 GHz Turbo, HT
Intel i9-10940X | 14x 3,3 - 4,6 GHz Turbo, HT
Intel i9-10920X | 12x 3,5 - 4,6 GHz Turbo, HT

They all have HT but I think you can easily turn it off. And because I really want to buy a machine that lasts as long as possible the 18 core CPU is my favorite so far.
But assuming that more single core speed could be perform better I'm asking myself if the 14 or even the 12 core may be the better option for some cases?

I'm really confused..

If someone is interested. Other specs will be: 32 GB RAM (seems a bit unbalanced for that CPU but can be easily upgraded in future and normally I don't need more). 500 GB M2 SSD for system and software + 1 TB SSD for samples + 1TB SSD for project files and sound effects + 500 GB SSD for games.
Graphics card is a 2060S but maybe will be upgraded to a 3070 soon.
To me it seems that the best option is Intel i9-10980XE with the most cores and fastest clock. Best of both worlds. What am I missing?
__________________
https://www.kdubbproductions.com/
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpC...2dGA3qUWBKrXQQ
i7 8700k,4.9Ghz,Win10,Reaper 6,Motu 828es, Cranborne ADAT500
poetnprophet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2020, 01:57 PM   #19
hanswurst123
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Hamburg
Posts: 104
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by poetnprophet View Post
To me it seems that the best option is Intel i9-10980XE with the most cores and fastest clock. Best of both worlds. What am I missing?
The clock speed of the 18-core is the lowest per core from the tree CPUs. Except cache which is higher on the 18-core. Or did you mean that?
hanswurst123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2020, 03:43 AM   #20
hanswurst123
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Hamburg
Posts: 104
Default

I could finally test with HT off!
And it makes small difference! The overall performance seems to be nearly equal BUT I have less crackles when moving the play cursor during playback.

I think it has something to do with the render-ahead value of anticipative FX processing. When it's 200 ms it does not crackle while HT is turned off. But it crackles when HT is turned on.

So I will keep HT turned OFF for a few projects and see how that does effect my system.
hanswurst123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2020, 07:55 AM   #21
poetnprophet
Human being with feelings
 
poetnprophet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 1,651
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hanswurst123 View Post
The clock speed of the 18-core is the lowest per core from the tree CPUs. Except cache which is higher on the 18-core. Or did you mean that?
ah sorry I missed that. honestly I thought the bigger number was THE number, didn't realize there were two measures.
__________________
https://www.kdubbproductions.com/
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpC...2dGA3qUWBKrXQQ
i7 8700k,4.9Ghz,Win10,Reaper 6,Motu 828es, Cranborne ADAT500
poetnprophet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2020, 03:51 AM   #22
hanswurst123
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Hamburg
Posts: 104
Default

In case anyone is interested.
I went with the i9-10940X and so far I'm very happy with it.

It's fast and I have no more lags and mini-freezes in Reaper when I'm skipping through the project.
Also M2 SSD rocks.. no need for batch resafe anymore
And the computer is super super quiet.. I hear nothing!

So thanks for all your help guys!
hanswurst123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2020, 04:04 AM   #23
Coachz
Human being with feelings
 
Coachz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 12,770
Default

Hyper threading on for me.

https://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=243544
Coachz is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2020, 11:02 AM   #24
OLSHALOM
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Austria
Posts: 443
Default

IT'S ALL DEPENDING:

- on the buffers you use on the realtime processing,
- your interfaces buffer size
- and the pdc and buffers of your plugins you use.

Low Latencies needs other settings than High Latencies.

For me Thread Priority and Behaviour had a big impact to improve and optimise my Mixing-Only-System using biggest possible buffers. (Plugins-with 40000spls pdc!!)
Reading what the text mean, which shows up when you move the mouse-cursor over the functions, helps to. Than everything makes sense.

And I got a stable crackle-free utilisation of 95%!! on my i9-9940 mixing in 96kHz.

How I organize my plugins, and their pdc, has the most impact. (FX sends, etc.
Also a trick you find on the forum is to spread the plugins on more tracks.
That works for me like a charm.
It looks like, that doing it, I'm getting more cpu-tasks and I can max out the hyper threading of my cpu.
Otherwise only the half of my cores are maxed out in use while the other half is doing nothing and getting crackles at only 50% of utilisation.

The pre-released Reaper-Versions help alot.

I don't have a lot experience with low latency-systems.

Hope that helps
OLSHALOM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2020, 11:31 AM   #25
vanhaze
Human being with feelings
 
vanhaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 5,247
Default

Wow, great useful info, thanks !
__________________
Macbook Pro INTEL | Reaper, always latest version | OSX Ventura | Presonus Studio 24c
My Reaper Tips&Tricks YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/vanhaze2000/playlists
vanhaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2020, 12:15 PM   #26
Coachz
Human being with feelings
 
Coachz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 12,770
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OLSHALOM View Post
IT'S ALL DEPENDING:

- on the buffers you use on the realtime processing,
- your interfaces buffer size
- and the pdc and buffers of your plugins you use.

Low Latencies needs other settings than High Latencies.

For me Thread Priority and Behaviour had a big impact to improve and optimise my Mixing-Only-System using biggest possible buffers. (Plugins-with 40000spls pdc!!)
Reading what the text mean, which shows up when you move the mouse-cursor over the functions, helps to. Than everything makes sense.

And I got a stable crackle-free utilisation of 95%!! on my i9-9940 mixing in 96kHz.

How I organize my plugins, and their pdc, has the most impact. (FX sends, etc.
Also a trick you find on the forum is to spread the plugins on more tracks.
That works for me like a charm.
It looks like, that doing it, I'm getting more cpu-tasks and I can max out the hyper threading of my cpu.
Otherwise only the half of my cores are maxed out in use while the other half is doing nothing and getting crackles at only 50% of utilisation.

The pre-released Reaper-Versions help alot.

I don't have a lot experience with low latency-systems.

Hope that helps
What is your RT CPU value?
Coachz is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2020, 03:47 PM   #27
OLSHALOM
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Austria
Posts: 443
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coachz View Post
What is your RT CPU value?
maximum 10%

PDC has a big impact on RT-CPU.
And i use a insane value for afxp: 999
Thread Priority: Time critical
Behaviour: relaxed
Media Buffers: default
Interface buffersize: 4096

But as said, it's dependent on your cpu, interface, etc...

Honestly I freezed a few Tracks after running this project on 95% maximum utilisation, cause I was afraid to heat up my manually overclocked cpu :-)

The graphics aren't smooth anymore at that level.

By the way:
nearly all Plugin's are Aqua's or Nebula instances with customized xml-settings.
Most DSP-Buffers set to 8192 wich gives in Erin a PDC of 42390spls.
So weird!!!

It would be great to have more infos about that topic in general, how it really works and relates.

Some knowledge of experts would be great.
OLSHALOM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2020, 04:37 PM   #28
Coachz
Human being with feelings
 
Coachz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 12,770
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OLSHALOM View Post
maximum 10%

PDC has a big impact on RT-CPU.
And i use a insane value for afxp: 999
Thread Priority: Time critical
Behaviour: relaxed
Media Buffers: default
Interface buffersize: 4096

But as said, it's dependent on your cpu, interface, etc...

Honestly I freezed a few Tracks after running this project on 95% maximum utilisation, cause I was afraid to heat up my manually overclocked cpu :-)

The graphics aren't smooth anymore at that level.

By the way:
nearly all Plugin's are Aqua's or Nebula instances with customized xml-settings.
Most DSP-Buffers set to 8192 wich gives in Erin a PDC of 42390spls.
So weird!!!

It would be great to have more infos about that topic in general, how it really works and relates.

Some knowledge of experts would be great.
How about at 128 buffer?
Coachz is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2020, 11:29 AM   #29
OLSHALOM
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Austria
Posts: 443
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coachz View Post
How about at 128 buffer?
As I said, I don't have much experience with low latencies.

But for sure a totally different scenario!
OLSHALOM is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:56 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.